<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Million Server Data Center</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2009/04/28/the-million-server-data-center/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2009/04/28/the-million-server-data-center/</link>
	<description>News and analysis about data centers, cloud computing, managed hosting and disaster recovery</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2012 17:24:17 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim Dorman</title>
		<link>http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2009/04/28/the-million-server-data-center/comment-page-1/#comment-3671</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim Dorman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 May 2009 03:39:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/?p=9823#comment-3671</guid>
		<description>Seems to be a case of putting too many eggs in one basket.  Granted, the center can be architected for high redundancy/availability/reliablility, but sooner or later some large scale catastrophy could affect the entire center, bringing down operations and potentially critical functions at once.  Much better to create geographical distance between two (or more) smaller scale facilities or affect some form of redundancy and ability to continue operaitons (for critical processes) despite some large scale disaster--earthquake, high explosive, large scale power outage, etc....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Seems to be a case of putting too many eggs in one basket.  Granted, the center can be architected for high redundancy/availability/reliablility, but sooner or later some large scale catastrophy could affect the entire center, bringing down operations and potentially critical functions at once.  Much better to create geographical distance between two (or more) smaller scale facilities or affect some form of redundancy and ability to continue operaitons (for critical processes) despite some large scale disaster&#8211;earthquake, high explosive, large scale power outage, etc&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

